4 questions about social science
Nancy 00001
Sampleanswer1.docxSAMPLE ANSWER
Public Attributions for Poverty in Canada – Reutter et al (2006)
1. What is the main argument presented by the author?
Surveys and interviews reveal that respondents are most likely to attribute poverty to structural factors (such as lack of education, low wages, discrimination, and lack of social safety net benefits) and least likely to favour individualistic attributions (such as laziness). The education and income levels of the respondents were the most consistent predictors of types of attributions.
2. What is the author’s research method? (i.e. how does he/she collect the data?) What are the size and characteristics of the sample?
Method: phase one involved interviews and phase two involved telephone surveys.
Sample size: 119 interviews; 1671 surveys (839 in Edmonton; 832 in Toronto).
59 low income and 60 higher income people were interviewed. 2/3 of respondents were women, 30 – 54 years old. The low-income participants were younger. Low-income people were more likely to have high-school education or less. In the sample of 34 low-income people in the six group interviews, 67.6% were female and 60.6% had a high-school education or less. Almost half were 30-44 years of age. The main sources of income were welfare and employment. (8)
3. List two pieces of data/information that the author uses to support his/her argument that is drawn from their research . Explain how the evidence is related to the main idea.
a) “I think that lack of education is probably one of the biggest factors. If you're not educated then you don't get the jobs that provide you with an income that you can live on (female, higher-income participant)” (12).
Explanation of relationship to the main idea: this quote supports the theme related to education – respondents indicated that they see education as a major structural factor related to poverty.
b) “I think most people who are living on a low income, many of them work just as hard as people who are making a high income. It's just for some reason their job does not pay them an adequate wage . . . they're unfortunate enough to be in a job that only pays eight bucks an hour (male, higher-income participant)” (10).
Explanation of the relationship to the main idea: this quote supports the theme related to the impact of structural factors such as low wages, inadequate social safety net or discrimination on causes of poverty.
4. Is the information provided verifiable and well-researched? How do you know? List the factors that you used to make your evaluation.
The authors provide a verifiable paper based on the following:
· The authors all work at one of the following universities: University of British Columbia, University of Alberta, York University, of University of Toronto
· The authors provide a thorough literature review that outlines the background issues in the study of public and individualistic attributions for poverty.
· The 3-page literature review is supported by a 3-page (single-spaced) bibliography of academic sources.
· The authors provide a thorough explanation of their research process, including the size and composition of sample. They point out that the sample contains more females. They indicate that they have only studied 2 cities but give a rationale for it (that these cities have similar poverty rates).
· The tables are clearly presented, and the authors explain the most important points demonstrated in each table. The authors also present interview quotes to support the themes listed in the results section.
· The authors report the limitations of the study. The respondents were all English-speaking and all had a landline telephone. This may have excluded recent immigrants and others who are more likely to be poor. The study also did not explore people’s attributions related to different types of people (i.e. single men vs. single mothers vs. welfare recipients vs. working poor). There may be differences of perspective related to different groups of people. This demonstrates that the authors acknowledge that the research findings are not completely generalizable to the entire population and that further research could provide more detailed information.
